Also, http://skepticproject.com/site/faq/, number 18 "Why do you use mainstream sources?". It is also funny how Alex Jones criticizes mainstream media for being fake or not real news yet constantly uses them.

Quote from Infowarrior_039
The problem with skeptics and "debunkers" of truth seekers like Alex Jones and others is that no matter what, something we have said or done is wrong, or currently inaccurate based on the information that is publicly available, and therefore nothing we say has any value because we have "no idea what we are talking about". These skeptics hurl attacks on truth seekers, caught up in their quest to prove us all wrong, become exactly what they are accusing us of. Indeed expect for the very few mistakes or misunderstandings we may have made, they offer very little evidence or proof that they have a better idea, a better understanding or explanation, nor do we have any solid proof or evidence that backs our claims.

I don't understand. Based on current information CT'ers don't know what they're talking about and we don't either? If we're the ones that understand the current information I think we should be the ones that know what we're talking about. As for better understandings/explanations, I think we do give better explanations when we prove their whole ideas as wrong and incorrect. Usually the CT'ers are the ones stating that the current explanations are false such as with the Boston Marathon Bombings, 9/11, UN, etc. etc. so it is on them to prove that what is currently known or understood is false. Since they can't and don't, I think we uphold that the current understandings/explanations are valid.

Thanks for the comments, em, I enjoyed the additional insight, and I must say that I completely agree with your points.

I don't understand. Based on current information CT'ers don't know what they're talking about and we don't either? If we're the ones that understand the current information I think we should be the ones that know what we're talking about. As for better understandings/explanations, I think we do give better explanations when we prove their whole ideas as wrong and incorrect. Usually the CT'ers are the ones stating that the current explanations are false such as with the Boston Marathon Bombings, 9/11, UN, etc. etc. so it is on them to prove that what is currently known or understood is false. Since they can't and don't, I think we uphold that the current understandings/explanations are valid.

Yeah, this a bit annoying when you have conspiracy theorists who are only interested in arguing. In the hate mail section on this website, you can notice a lot of stuff like that.